Normally only the first 2-3 Bills on any Private Members' Bill day have a realistic chance of being debated. However, any Bill on the order paper can proceed “on the nod” without a debate at the end of business, provided no Member objects.

Sadly for Cunningham, his bill has been scheduled 63rd on the order paper for the day. Hardly worth him even turning up just to hear 'object' again, is it?

I'm sure this particular invasion of privacy and abuse of property rights will rear its grotesque head again at some point in the future - no doubt with Cunningham's equally grotesque gob spouting in favour of it - but, for now at least, it would appear to be as dead as a mammoth's scrotum.

Such news merits a snifter or two of the good stuff tonight, methinks.

That the Human Rights Act will triumph over all and any attempts to ban smoking on (or in) private property.

But should they try it; I and thousands of others will likely take it to the courts. So Mr Government, unless you have deep pockets, lots of time and a comfortable margin in the polls, do you really want to risk it? Do yeh?